rent_affordability

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

As a pure calculation tool, it implies no side effects or external calls. The description details the output (rent ceiling in MAD and USD) and the rule applied. Yet, it does not explicitly state that it's read-only or clarify potential edge cases (e.g., both inputs provided), though these are partially addressed in the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise, consisting of three clear sentences: purpose, rule, and input/output specification. It contains no redundancy or irrelevant information, making it efficient and easy to parse.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description adequately explains the return value (comfortable rent ceiling in both MAD and USD). It covers the calculation rule and inputs. It could be more explicit about the output format or error handling, but overall it provides sufficient context for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema already provides descriptions for both parameters (net_monthly_income_mad and net_monthly_income_usd), including the precedence rule. The tool description adds the 33% rule, which is not in the schema, but it does not significantly enhance understanding beyond what the schema already covers, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's function: computing a comfortable rent ceiling based on net income using a 33% rule. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like rent_vs_buy (comparison) and search_rentals (listing search) by focusing solely on affordability calculation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It provides explicit input instructions (provide income in MAD or USD) and mentions the consistency with marocain.investments/finance, which implies when to use it for matching that website. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, so it falls short of full guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.